The right to die

A recent story in the New York Times questions lethal injections as a humane method to carry out the death penalty. As I have given some thought to the way I'd prefer to die, this debate genuinely interests me.

Setting aside the death penalty issue, should humans have a choice about ending their own lives? Should only those brave enough to commit hara-kiri be able to voluntarily close up shop? If the state can order my demise, either directly or by sending me off to war, should I not have that "right" for myself?

I realise this opens Pandora's Box on euthanasia and assisted suicide but it seems to me in this season of death and resurrection, and as death is common to all of us - so far at least - it wouldn't hurt to engage in some discussion about its terms.

[If you find that you need to log in to read the NYT's article, but can't be bothered to register with them to do so, you can use one of the logins from here.]

Comments

[jake on 15.04.06 at 12:02]

I like the idea that one's life is one's own, but on reflection I would have to say I disagree.

The State's right to end my life depends on actions I control. In war, I can be a conscientious objector, and self seclude.

With the death penalty, I can choose not to kill; a choice many people in fact make. (Full disclosure, I do not support the death penalty)In the words of Clint Eastwood, "you take everything he has, and everything he's gonna' have."

I guess I fall on the side of the state making better rules than the individual in this area (we hope).

When one has terminal illness and is in constant pain, perhaps, but too many people face temporary problems and seek a permanent solution. To protect those people from themselves, I would say no.

[Martin on 15.04.06 at 14:34]

I tend to agree with Jake, in that my grandmother took her own life at the grand age of 84 and, having read the "note" followed by the Coroner's report, it was abundantly clear that it was her ignorance of her condition that was at fault. To use Jake's words, very much a "temporary" problem.

Outside of that though, I do not struggle with the "right to die" argument at all. Whilst I understand the pro-lifers point of view, I cannot agree with it and consider such a view arrogant in the extreme.

One must be able to decide that enough is enough when you are up against it for the last and final time. Life has to have reasonable quality...without it, there is little point in being around.

[Martin on 15.04.06 at 14:37]

Continuation...

And I certainly do not want to live in any kind of hell, simply because someone else says so. Let them suffer if they want to do so - but let me go.

[silencedogood on 15.04.06 at 15:27]

Stuart,

I think your last paragraph answers your question. Why open pandora's box? People who truly want to die have been finding a way for centuries.

If assisted suicide is brought into the mainstream it brings up many moral, ethical, and legal questions for the public and government to decide on. Too many to make the effort worthwhile in my opinion.

[SmokingGun on 15.04.06 at 15:41]

Sorry, call me heartless but when it comes to the death penalty I'm all for it. Take a life give a life. I think the only right the criminal should have is to die the exact same way that they killed their victim.

As for how I want to go? Let me share a short story from a friend who's friend's dad just passed away two weeks ago.

A few weeks ago he went to see his 83 year old dad and spent the day with him and of all things took him out for dinner at the local Hooters Restaurant. They had a great time and when he dropped his dad off his father turned to him and said "Son, now that is what I would call a really great day. Thanks."

He then turned in for the night. He never woke up.

[J Starling on 15.04.06 at 18:08]

I beleive the death penalty is a cop out. I'ld rather have life mean just that, life. Sure, re-evaluate the case and the evidence every decade or so just to ensure we've got the right person, but death? Sorry, I can't justify that. YEs, if someone killed/raped a close family member/friend, I'll probably be calling for blood, but I would be to subjective to make an objective call.

I would have no problem with euthanasia for people with terminal incurable diseases, and also for clinically brain dead peoples with the next of kins permission.

[SmokingGun on 15.04.06 at 18:19]

OK give em life. Up in the northern reaches of Canada. And sell hunting permits with the proceeds going to pay for the welfare needs of their victim's families or orphaned kids.

I know of a couple sitting in Bermuda who should be thinking of packing their bags.....

[Lisa on 16.04.06 at 00:22]

I hate to sound like a broken record but I have to say one more time, that I am dissapointed to come here and find YET ANOTHER article that is not related to Bermuda. Stuart... you have so much knowledge on local isses and I'd much rather read your opinions on them than come here only to discover that you have found something mildly interesting in the New York Times.

[Bill Cook on 16.04.06 at 09:31]

Stuart,

I think this is a very interesting subject that as you say affects everyone.

We really seldom can choose how we depart but I am sure many have had close encounters.

Left to almost bleed to death from a knife wound that severed an artery in my abdomen at age 13 and a half yrs old was one such and delaying a Pan Am flight from New Zealand in 1974 that I was booked on and went down in Pago Pago was another !

We dont really have control over our departure but instead of Pandora's Box what about Godiva's Box ? death by chocolate has a certain appeal to a chocaholic like me !

On a serious note though people should have the right to decide when life becomes too painful or practical to continue for many valid reasons but it is a contentious issue probably due to possible abuse etc.

In ancient Rome the choice was given to drink a cup of Hemlock at least for the nobility and the German top brass were given a loaded Luger but for other folk I would rather not mention their methods.

Some are rather lucky like my fathewr who passed at age 94 in his sleep never having been seriously ill in his entire life would that we all should be so lucky.

[J Galt on 16.04.06 at 09:37]

"To protect those people from themselves, I would say no"

Jake adults are not children, we do not need to be protected from ourselves. We need to be protected from people like yourself who wish to force their will on others, by restricting the rights and freedoms, that all rational adults are entitled to.

What claim do you have to my life? If I wish to end it, why does it concern you?

[stuart J Hayward on 16.04.06 at 09:40]

Lisa,
Thank you for your kind words.

I have been asked to write for this blog on topics that interest me — this one does. And I am grateful for the chance to put this traditionally taboo topic out there for discussion. As mortality affects us all, local and foreign alike, you'll forgive me I hope for thinking this would be of local interest.

I do, however, hear your frustration.

A glance through the archives of LiB shows a preponderance of locally related topics. And I know from LImey that he wants a strong representation of local content. Your comments will no doubt reinforce that for him.

[Bill Cook on 16.04.06 at 09:47]

I should know better Galt !!

Because sometimes we must be protected from ourselves during periods of deep depression for example that can be treated which is not meddling, and while the welfare of others may not concern you, that it concerns Jake is a choice he is permitted to make also in exercising his free will.

[Carol Shuman on 16.04.06 at 14:45]

Interesting topic, Stuart. I disagree with Lisa's statement that it isn't Bermuda centered. Death belongs to everyone!

One of my doctoral research projects was on attitudes toward euthanasia, certainly related to suicide. I studied two groups--one from Bermuda College and the other from Texas A&M, my school, all in their first two years of college, of course. I was interested in the cross cultural differences.

I used a 60-second film clip of Richard Dreyfuss in "Whose Life Is It Anyway?" with Dreyfuss, a former sculptor, now quadriplegic, asking to die--with a second 60-second-clip of a judge saying he could die. The question was: Did the patient's plea or the judge's decision result in more change in attitude?

Better continue this, I'll time out!

[Carol Shuman on 16.04.06 at 14:55]

As I was saying,

Results in Bermuda showed people were more likely to endorse euthanasia if the judge ruled that way. The patient's plea didn't affect them a bit!

In the U.S. the judge's ruling didn't affect them a bit--In face, people who heard the judge were more likely to rebel!

I believe that these results were based on several reasons:

Culturally, Americans are less likely to buy into authoritarian rulings (e.g. the judge) and more likely to support individual rights (the patient).

The critical care options in Bermuda are not as great. People who require very serius care usually get it overseas.

There are very few people in Bermuda who are on long term care that requires respirators, tube feeding, and other types of care that can result in "passive euthanasia" when the care is removed. Thus, it isn't seen as much.

Me? Personally, I don't think anyone can make that decision until they're faced with it. And, for sure, "intellectual" decisions have little relationship to "emotional" decisions...

Best,

Carol

[Radio 4 LIstener on 16.04.06 at 16:17]

Stuart. I very much welcome your broadening of the topic base. As a non Bermudian in the UK I find it frustrating to generally be unable to comment on the posts due to insuffient background knowledge.
This is a debate I have taken part in, on a number of ocassions in over 24 years, at my local discussion group.

I cannot agree with capital punishment. Too many innocent people have been killed for crimes they did not commit.A life sentence is greater punishment and if a mistake has been made it can be rectified.

In theory I agree with euthansia. In practice I cannot see how you could make watetight safeguards.

[Martin on 16.04.06 at 16:57]

Carol wrote:

"Results in Bermuda showed people were more likely to endorse euthanasia if the judge ruled that way. The patient's plea didn't affect them a bit!

Me? Personally, I don't think anyone can make that decision until they're faced with it. And, for sure, "intellectual" decisions have little relationship to "emotional" decisions..."

Carol - on a genuine point of interest...

Presumably, the emotions kick in and prevail over the mind, when you are up against it. That said, what does that do to the Bermudian study results which - if I have read it write - suggest that intellect is stronger than heart.

[J Galt on 16.04.06 at 18:03]

"...that it concerns Jake is a choice he is permitted to make also in exercising his free will."

Jake's concern for his fellow man is fine and dandy Bill, and I agree he has every right to exercise his free will, except when he intrudes on others' rights to exercise thiers.

Imagine if you would for a second that you are a Quadriplegic, with out the ability to talk, the only way you can communicate is by blinking, wouldn't you rather you can choose assisted suicide to end your mudane existance or would you support Jake's feel good, "I'm protecting you from yourself so just lay there and blink mentalilty".

Jake is wrong in my opinion because he removes an individuals right to his/her's own life.

[Bill Cook on 16.04.06 at 19:35]

All well and good Galt,

On the other hand imagine you were the person who lost the one person that you loved and were loved by who gave meaning to life and without, lost that meaning.

If you had children and others who depended on you, but in your despair you wanted to give up life, would it not be morally correct to assist that person over that period of despair, to live out the balance of natural life?

There are in my opinion valid reasons to be my brothers keeper.

[david on 16.04.06 at 19:37]

Its all well and good agreeing with euthanasia but what right do you all have in just assuming all doctors are happy to administer medication to curtail death. I'm all for patients who are ill and on life support being switched off prematurely if their's no hope of any quality of life. However, someone who is stable not in immenent death yet wanting a doctor to kill them is completely different. Its impossible to legislate and impossible to draw up rules for doctors to be guided by. The other problem is that in the UK we are currently living in a culture where doctors are demonised in some tabloids. There have been very public cases where doctors have had to go to court to ask to switch off life support or reach an agreement should the patient become a more unwell then we wouldn't jump on the chest. The family calls us murderers just asking for this. How can we therefore expect us to make any such decision as what many pro-euthanasiasts what us to make with complete confidence its the right one. Doctors are trained to treat and this should remain. We should not be expected to prolong life at all costs but curtailing it prematurely is different. These living wills are all very good and we feel better about ourselves but remember its not all down to you. Look at Terri Schiavo in 2001 and the outrageous public outpouring in the US, where everyone thought they knew whats best not her own husband. It was ludicrous, even Bush got involved and the whole fiasco was worth of a common british phase "only in america". Its pointless discussing it in the current climate and anyway remember who would be doing the killing

[J Galt on 17.04.06 at 00:37]

"On the other hand imagine you were the person who lost the one person that you loved and were loved by who gave meaning to life and without, lost that meaning"

I'm not sure I'm following you here Bill, are you asking me to imagine a person I love killing themselves?

[Bill Cook on 17.04.06 at 06:47]

Galt

I dont think that you are quite that dumb.

There are times when anyone can reach a point where depression can lead them to suicide.

Depression can be successfully treated and the person can go on to lead a full life again as productive members of society as evidenced by many prominent public figures who have spoken of their own experiences such as Mike Wallace of 60 minutes who is still working into his 80 s.
The point therefore is that someone like you feels they should be allowed to die wheras others think that they need treatment by others to recover as it is unlikely they can suceed otherwise on their own.

[jake on 17.04.06 at 08:10]

Galt,

Here is the quote in its entirety:

"When one has terminal illness and is in constant pain, perhaps, but too many people face temporary problems and seek a permanent solution. To protect those people from themselves, I would say no."

What I say no to is an expansion of authorized means to take one's life. In your example of the blinking person, I would leave it to them. To the high schooler who has had a first heart break, I would not open it up. Nor would I open it up generally.

I am sure you will find the restriction of any right a terrible enfringement of your human dignity, but then you are an extremist, and this is your favorite tune.

Sing it.

[Ethiops on 17.04.06 at 10:48]

If death is at the door let his ass on in and if life she wants to leave then let her asshole go.

There should be a public death chamber in every parish. In major cities there should be heaps. Life is often held with high regard when it doesn’t have to be. Some will argue what life is about, when it seems apparent the ultimate thing we do with life is loose it to the realm of death. Yes I would support giving people the option of checking out if it be their wish.

[Sleepy on 17.04.06 at 11:01]

The comments on this site have at times driven me to comtemplate suicide.

[silencedogood on 17.04.06 at 11:06]

No kidding. Ethiops your McDeathchamber visions are exactly why suicide should not be institutionalized...wow...

[SmokingGun on 17.04.06 at 11:34]

When trying to cheer someone up I always found the phrase "hang in there" to be a little bit of an oxymoron....

As far as Jake and Bill's argument I would have to agree. There are times when someone may lose a personal loved one who was their everything. Life might seem pretty pointless there-after, and in some aspects it might well be. But this isn't physical pain or sickness that will result in a death. It is a silent stress and emotional distress, something that can to a great degree be helped. It is often the reason we need good friends before we need doctors. (I get the feeling Bill speaks from experience.)

On the other hand, I cannot imagine what it would be like to lose my ability to play my guitar and socialize with my friends. Selfish as it may be if I were to be left without the use of my body I imagine I'd find it difficult living and wish to have the power to choose ending my life. But as Carol said, I do not truly know how I'd feel until it happened. It's a tough question.

[J Galt on 17.04.06 at 12:06]

"There are times when anyone can reach a point where depression can lead them to suicide."

Bill are you saying that a person should have the right to end their life, but if they choose to do so because of a reason you don't find acceptable then they are irrational and there for shouldn't have the right to commit suicide?

I mean your "I am my brother's keeper" crap can start there and traverse into those who make choices about thier lives that you don't agree with say smoking, tattoos, homosexuality, etc...

Or we could just let each adult live thier life as they see fit, gosh thats extreme.

[Two Cents on 17.04.06 at 12:10]

Having spent quite a bit of time "laying around" in various hospitals both locally and overseas, it seems to me that in too many cases, the families "needs" are often times put ahead of those of the individual patient.

How we treat the dead & the dying is “strange” to say the least. In two cases that spring to mind, I can remember two patients that I have met during my extended hospital stays, one guy was 89, he had two strokes, Parkinson’s disease, and was barely able to speak, during the evenings he would talk to me (listening to that was a chore) after his family had left, several times, he expressed that he would like to die, however his family weren't ready to “let him go”, and as a consequence, they ignored his pleas for them to let him die, they wouldn't sign the DNR (do not resuscitate ) order, as he could no longer write, and had previously signed over power of attorney, he was essentially trapped.

The other patient that I met was older (80+), and I watched him die, and his family was so absorbed in their own business, as well as his property, money, etc they would come in nightly and spend their “obglitorty” 15-20 mins with him, and would talk amongst themselves obviously planning what would happen to him after he died, funeral, burial, etc as if he wasn’t laying right there next to them. His needs were almost ignored daily. I’d bet that both of these men would have preferred to die instead of the being put through their daily ordeal of “living”. I often felt sick after they left and made a promise to myself that I would never do that to my parents, although with my current health problems, they’ll most likely out live me so that shouldn’t worry me too greatly I guess.

[Bill Cook on 17.04.06 at 13:05]

Two Cents,

Regrettably your experiences are all too common and most of us could confirm similar experiences.

Perhaps it is part of our culture as in my experience the elderly are treated differently in the Far East where the families seem closer and the very young and very old live in the same house etc but this may be changing.

A living will is important for people in those circumstances and in Switzerland and possibly Holland they seem more advanced.

The very old do not fear dying but most fear growing old because facilities are not very good here for example also some folk are old at 70 and some are young at 85 and playing great golf There are many variables in biological aging it seems.

I hope that the hospital care you receive is of a high standard and I think someone like yourself should be consulted when our Hospital plans future development as to what can be done to improve lengthy stays food atmosphere etc.

[Ethiops on 17.04.06 at 13:27]

silencedogood - We have right to live options why not the same for death, it seems only appropriate. In many places women can get life yanked out of them as they see fit, why shouldn’t others have opportunity to do the same with their person?

I guess being who I am it allows me to see that we are all intrinsically connected having started off with the same starting point. That being it’s not of the utmost importance that we hang around until the very last breath within us decides to leave. Civilization will continue.
Mind you I don’t know what it would take for me to require such a service outside not being able to cook, clean myself, and function in some sort of capacity.

[Martin on 17.04.06 at 13:49]

Is it death - or dying we are not afraid of?

For me - it's the later. The thought of the latter fills me with abject misery.

[J Galt on 17.04.06 at 14:29]

Bill,

I think 2 cents point was it should be left to the individual to decide if they want to continue living.

In his story you and Jake are the family members forcing your will on another because you believe your needs out weighs the individual's right to choose for themselves.

[Linda on 17.04.06 at 15:02]

This is a very interesting topic. I believe a person should have the right to die as they wish. I've seen too many dignified men and women go out of this world suffering intense pain and having their dignity stripped from them in their helplessness. There is a big difference between the quality of life and quantity of years. I have made my feelings clear to my husband. If I should suffer an accident, where I am left without the ability to do for myself personally, and communicate, and to do the things that bring me pleasure, such as gardening, caring for my husband and pets, then I really do not want any heroic efforts made on my behalf to prolong my existence. This really shouldbe a personal choice, and a living will should be made when one is able and of sound mind.

[Full Fullish on 17.04.06 at 15:10]

Linda I can't agree more. I've also told my wife the very same thing. I'd rather be a fond memory than a burden on my family, should I be in a total incapacitated state. It's not fair to the person and it's not fair to their loved ones. When it's your time to go, go gracefully at least, or in a spectacular ball of fire like myself. :)

[silencedogood on 17.04.06 at 15:12]

Ethiops,

As Linda's post indicates people can take action to ensure their wishes are followed such as a living will. After Terri Schaivo anyone who cares about the subject will get one.

In the future I will not respond if you continue with your current tone which I find distasteful. You are, of course, free to do as you like but it's not worth my time.

[Bill Cook on 17.04.06 at 15:25]

Martin,

You may be interested in what Woody Allen had to say ?

He said " I have no problem about dying I just do not want to be there when it happens !"

[Ethiops on 17.04.06 at 17:10]

silencedogood - I’m confused nonetheless feel free to do as you wish. It didn’t dawn on me that I had a tone. I was merely sharing my view on the issue in my own way. My bad if this irritates you, but, for the life of me I can imagine why. They’re only views that are at best subject to change.

[silencedogood on 17.04.06 at 17:30]

Ethiops,

No personal offense taken, I just think there are better ways to state your opinions than talking about "yanking" life out of people and public death chambers in every parish. It seems as though you are being overly-provocative on purpose, but then again you are in Europe so it's a different standard innit? ;)

I do agree with you that assisted suicide is consistent with abortion, but I don't agree with that either which is an entirely different debate I'm not interested in pursuing.

[Martin on 17.04.06 at 19:24]

Bill...

Thanks for the reminder - I had heard it before but (suprisingly?) not attributed to Woody.

Dam it though...just he happens to be right.

[Bill Cook on 17.04.06 at 20:07]

Martin,
I sat close to Woody and his wife at Wimbledon couple of yrs ago and felt he could go at any minute !

Remember living well is the best revenge and in 30 or 40 yrs you will feel quite different about things.

For me an agnostic with no hope of a life hereafter no white flashing lights at the end of the tunnel or meeting up with my mates for a Sunday nite poker game just the end its a bit different but you see my idea of Hell is living forever of course I dont believe in either Heaven or Hell and tell my Muslim friends with their silly notion of Paradise and all those Virgins just remember you also get the mothers in law ! there is no free lunch buddy.

[Ethiops on 17.04.06 at 21:24]

silencedogood - Now I understand and point taken. On my side I’ve been watching South Park the episode where garison has a sex change; I even think the term came directly from there. It wasn’t to be rude. ;)

[Martin on 17.04.06 at 21:51]

Bill...

Well in 30 or 40 yrs from nowe I will be 85 or 95,

Take your pick - I don't think either will worry me given my health record.

That said - the thought of meeting either my first or second mother in law frightens me somewhat - virgins or not !

[Martin on 17.04.06 at 21:54]

Oh yes.........

As for living well, didn't someone once say that it is better to live life to the full and go sliding into your grave saying "that was one hell of a ride" as opposed to not living life to the full and going quietly?